EK 1 'WS' for review

[EK Hunter]

This EK 1 came in the mail today. It's maker marked WS (without a box). It also has a very small and barely legible mark at the hinge: TRZ or TFZ, unless I'm mistaken. Unfortunately this mark is too small and faint to photograph. Your opinions and comments are welcome. Thanks.

Best, Alex

[Montgomery Burns]

nice cross ,,,very nice cross .

and the mark is just the one would want ,,,


regards kay

[Jelle M.]

I agree, sweet and untouched cross

[evilmike]

Yep usually have a perhaps a quality control mark on the pin if I recall I have a A and B on mine

[EK Hunter]

nice cross ,,,very nice cross .

and the mark is just the one would want ,,,


regards kay

Thanks Kay. I think I read an earlier post by you that identified this cross and maker as an early production wartime piece. Am I right?

[streptile]

Very nice Alex

[streptile]

Alex, this one isn't Wagner's very first generation EK1; those had cast iron cores with a different design and were unmarked. The second generation were identical to the first but included a mark. Then came this cross. So I would call this the third generation, according to what we know at this point in time. All these early types used the same frame (which is also the same frame on the famous Wagner 1870 EKs), and after the introduction of the stamped-steel core, we see multiple cores in use on Wagners, and I personally don't see a way (yet) of putting the cores in any chronological order. Yours is (obviously) one of them.

I suspect that Wagner went through these first three types within the first year of the war.

The next thing to change was the frame. Here is a good example of one of these "4th generation" Wagners: still with the same early pin setup, but with a new frame and one of their may cores:



Next, the hinge changed:



...then a lot more stuff happened, but that gets us into the middle of the war.

[Montgomery Burns]

Thanks Kay. I think I read an earlier post by you that identified this cross and maker as an early production wartime piece. Am I right?

yes its throe ,,I have a photo negative Glass plate where one can identifies a core ..or at least close to what you have core wise .

name of the veteran known,,,,,,, cause of getting his iron crosses ,,,,,,,,,and the date's of him receiving the rewards ..

got that in my book..

remark for this particular core type and its crown,,,,,, there are at least 3/4 similar cores with only a slight difference .
one of the easiest to identify is the one with a W that has one of the 3 arms stands farther outwards ( thin arm ).

yours core is a bit different ,,,but it most likely could be one of the same badge .( the WS mark is telling me that)


nice catch indeed ...regards kay

ps ,,especially WS is having so far ,,,,the most different core types around ,,,,if you're interested in cores types ,,that is the maker you're looking fore .

[Tan Berk]

This is the WS I have which never shared before, now might be a good time to share for comparison, Trevor which generation do you think this one is?

[EK Hunter]

Alex, this one isn't Wagner's very first generation EK1; those had cast iron cores with a different design and were unmarked. The second generation were identical to the first but included a mark. Then came this cross. So I would call this the third generation, according to what we know at this point in time. All these early types used the same frame (which is also the same frame on the famous Wagner 1870 EKs), and after the introduction of the stamped-steel core, we see multiple cores in use on Wagners, and I personally don't see a way (yet) of putting the cores in any chronological order. Yours is (obviously) one of them.

I suspect that Wagner went through these first three types within the first year of the war.

The next thing to change was the frame. Here is a good example of one of these "4th generation" Wagners: still with the same early pin setup, but with a new frame and one of their may cores:

Next, the hinge changed:

...then a lot more stuff happened, but that gets us into the middle of the war.

Thanks for the detailed information, Trevor. You're input is always appreciated.

[Montgomery Burns]

I am confused ,,Trevor.

could you explain to me , and my fella collectors
(who are very interested at the moment) where the Wagner inside production knowledge come from .?

you said,
:this one isn't Wagner's very first generation EK1; those had cast iron cores with a different design and were unmarked.

I would like to know how that first core looked like ,,do you have a picture?.
or a link.

second question:

The second generation were identical to the first but included a mark.
the second generation mark ? ,,how did it look like ? do you have a picture ?
or link .

the other thing ,
I suspect that Wagner went through these first three types within the first year of the war,,,

how do you know ?,,do you have a 1914 catalog of Wagner ? or other evidence ? or a link ?

and you also say :
I personally don't see a way (yet) of putting the cores in any chronological order.
WY ?,, you did a perfect chronological job here ......


hope I do not sound all to stupid in asking these questions ,,but ,,I just wondered ..

hope this is going to be interesting.

just questions ok .

regards kay

[Montgomery Burns]

Ohh I forgotten the most important question ,,,

how dos one recognize a cast core from a pressed core ?


regards kay

.

[Mike Kenny]

Ohh I forgotten the most important question ,,,

how dos one recognize a cast core from a pressed core ?


regards kay

.

Kay, I am very surprised an experienced EK collector is asking that question.

You only have to go back to pre-1900 1870 EKs to see the effect and then take the knowledge forward to earlier 1914 EKs, most likely produced before large numbers of EKs started to become required (probably late 1915ish). Even then, there would have been an overlap period between refinements to core casting methods and sheet iron stamped/die struck cores.

In my experience, it is the slightly rough, very fine sandy texture under the black finish which gives them away. Invariably the cast iron cores will be flat (I've got maybe 1 or 2 which have a very slight "factory" vault) as they are much less malleable than sheet iron cores. They are also commonly cracked these days (not all the time of course) and the cracked edges show the cores are relatively thicker compared to thin sheet iron cores. Sheet iron cores will generally not crack - not to say they can't be broken though!

Re trying to date WS crosses, Trevor has already hit on the frames but I would also add the hardware combination into the mix, specifically the shape of the main pin. Earlier pins appear to exhibit a lot more hand finishing compared to late ones which show little variation.

Exact dating, even relative dating, will always be subjective/speculative rather than definitive though, as none of us were there at the time.

Regards
Mike

[Montgomery Burns]

Kay, I am very surprised an experienced EK collector is asking that question.

You only have to go back to pre-1900 1870 EKs to see the effect and then take the knowledge forward to earlier 1914 EKs, most likely produced before large numbers of EKs started to become required (probably late 1915ish). Even then, there would have been an overlap period between refinements to core casting methods and sheet iron stamped/die struck cores.

In my experience, it is the slightly rough, very fine sandy texture under the black finish which gives them away. Invariably the cast iron cores will be flat (I've got maybe 1 or 2 which have a very slight "factory" vault) as they are much less malleable than sheet iron cores. They are also commonly cracked these days (not all the time of course) and the cracked edges show the cores are relatively thicker compared to thin sheet iron cores. Sheet iron cores will generally not crack - not to say they can't be broken though!

Re trying to date WS crosses, Trevor has already hit on the frames but I would also add the hardware combination into the mix, specifically the shape of the main pin. Earlier pins appear to exhibit a lot more hand finishing compared to late ones which show little variation.

Exact dating, even relative dating, will always be subjective/speculative rather than definitive though, as none of us were there at the time.

Regards
Mike

hy Mike ,,thanks you replied ,,
Sure,, in most cases cast is obvious ,,would be something If I would not know the difference .

the reason WY I ask is because I seen core's that where as smooth as a stamped one's,,,, but should have a casted surface as you describe as cast... and the other way around ,,,,If I remember correctly , KMST ek's .
I know there is a casting technique fore that ,, as early as 1813 .( royal Gleiwitzer cast factory had such a technique )

And ,,talking about 1870's /1890's examples,,,,( I never held in hand myself )
AWS 1890's I always saw very close to the smoothness of a stamped core .
is it ?,,,,or not ?

if that is so ,,,WY would Wagner start with casted cores ?

so far ,,,I always used the code,,
that a casted core always deviate in measurements .
as that is a rule in metallurgy and casting.

less so in stamping iron ,,,,
wy not look at it ...

regards kay

[streptile]

I am confused ,,Trevor.

That's okay. It's a bit confusing at first.

you said,
:this one isn't Wagner's very first generation EK1; those had cast iron cores with a different design and were unmarked.

I would like to know how that first core looked like ,,do you have a picture?.
or a link.

Here's a link that shows the first Wagner type.

second question:

The second generation were identical to the first but included a mark.
the second generation mark ? ,,how did it look like ? do you have a picture ?
or link .

Here's a link to one of these -- same exact type, but with a mark.

the other thing ,
I suspect that Wagner went through these first three types within the first year of the war,,,

how do you know ?

I don't know, or I wouldn't have said "I suspect."

and you also say :
I personally don't see a way (yet) of putting the cores in any chronological order.
WY ?,, you did a perfect chronological job here ......

Thank you. I agree my chronology of frames, cores and marks is correct, but cores are more difficult because they seem somewhat random for Wagner.

Perhaps a project for the forum to tackle together?